Since I am not an ecologist, when I teach the ecology lecture I 'go by the book' and trust that the textbook will be reasonably accurate. But now, perhaps I should rethink the way I teach about ecological succession...What do my ecological readers think?
Search
Profile
My scientific specialty is chronobiology (circadian rhythms and photoperiodism), with additional interests in comparative physiology, animal behavior and evolution. I am not an MD so I cannot diagnose and treat your sleep problems. As well as writing this blog, I am also the Online Discussion Expert for PLoS. This is a personal blog and opinions within it in no way reflect the policies of PLoS. You can contact me at: Coturnix@gmail.com
Buy the 2008 Science Blogging Anthology:
Buy the 2007 Science Blogging Anthology:
Buy the 2006 Science Blogging Anthology:
Recent Posts
- ScienceOnline'09 - interview with Christian Casper
- ScienceOnline2010 - introducing the participants
- Clock Quotes
- Tweetlinks, 11-08-09
- The podcast of the radio show is now online
- ScienceOnline2010 - Program highlights
- Clock Quotes
- Tweetlinks, 11-07-09
- Ignite talks at ScienceOnline2010
- Clock Quotes
Recent Comments
- Christian Casper on ScienceOnline'09 - interview with Christian Casper
- Catharine on Tweetlinks, 11-08-09
- LuLu on BIO101 - Lecture 7 - Physiology: Coordinated Response
- Coturnix on Cool new Scienceblogs.com widgets
- JohnV on Cool new Scienceblogs.com widgets
- Coturnix on Cool new Scienceblogs.com widgets
- JohnV on Cool new Scienceblogs.com widgets
- Occam Razor on Will there be terrorist attacks if Obama is the President?
- DeLene on Science Cafe Raleigh: Boom 'n' Doom: Volcanoes, North Carolina and North Carolina Volcanoes
- Russell on Clock Quotes
Archives
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
Blogroll
Find me on...
Make Me Happy
Add Scienceblogs to your Technorati Favorites!
Make Me Solvent
I Support
Bloggie Stuff
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License.
« ClockQuotes | Main | My picks from ScienceDaily »
Ecological succession: scientific theories succeeding each other?
Category: Ecology
Posted on: April 14, 2008 5:08 AM, by Coturnix
Find more posts in: 
Life Science
Environment
Share this: Facebook Twitter Stumbleupon Reddit Email + More
TrackBacks
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/69485
Comments
Well, this has sort of thing has really been known for decades. Indeed in the early 20th century, Clements was competing with Gleason, who argued for a more random view of things. The Gleasonian view has been in vogue for years now.
Posted by: SteveF | April 14, 2008 7:30 AM
I agree with Steve. Also, most ecologists recognize stochastic processes like recruitment in thinking about succession. I'm biased towards the marine world, but I think you might find salt marsh and rocky intertidal succession useful examples for class. There's a lot of discussion on how different forces, such as competition, facilitation, and physical stress, interact to influence successional patterns. This book is a good reference.
Posted by: Miriam | April 14, 2008 1:50 PM